Announcer spending thiswill be hour talking about the impeachment process with two men who know the subject very well. We will start with Daniel Freeman, first and could have them tell about themselves. Alan. Tell us little bit about yourself. What your background with impeachment. Guest my background with impeachment starts with the impeachment of chairman of the Judiciary Committee who hired me to do that. While i was doing that one another one came up of walter nixon. So i did those two and then there was a gap of quite a few years and then i did two more. Kent,porteous and judge there have been eight judges and in fact all the convictions of impeachments involve eight judges and have had the honor of handling three of the eight. Couldnt do the first one because i think it was in 1803. A little before my time. And ive been very interested in impeachment ever since then. And tell us about yourself whats your involvement with impeachment. Guest i worked a house Judiciary Committee for
We will get started just in a second. Welcome, i have a brief Opening Statement and doctors lawyer thank you for coming. Well get you sworn in here in a moment. Its important that we have this oversight here and there is a couple of inquiry and everything is about Jeffrey Epstein and hopefully about the first steps act and where could we go from there and how could you build upon that and those of three areas i would like to talk about at all tonight over. Thank you very much mister chairman. I want to welcome you and its wonderful for me to say a woman in charge so we can celebrate for a few moments at least that you are responsible for the care and custody of over 180,000 federal inmates and one of the Justice Departments largest employers and approximately 35,500 employees as may of this year. As the chairman mentioned there are two issues i hope we can focus on. One is the First Step Act which you mentioned and the second is applaud blooms with staffing within your department. Im g
Theres a couple areas of inquiry, all things Jeffrey Epstein and hopefully about the implementation of the First Step Act and where could we go from there. How could you buildyt upon that . Those of the three areas i would like to talk about and altered over to senator feinstein. Thank you very much, mr. Cha. I want to welcome you. Its wonderful for me to see a woman int charge, and so we can celebrate it for a few moments at least. You are responsible for the care and custody of over 180,000 federal inmates, and one of the Justice Departments largest employers with approximately 35,500 employees as of may of this year. As the chairman mentioned, there are two issues i hope we can focus on. One is the first act, which he mentioned, and the second is problems with staffing and conditions within your department. Im going to put most of this in the record, but i think, i think what ill do, mr. Chairman, in the interest of time is just put the statement in the record. Without objection. Se
Verses regents of the university of california and the related cases. General francisco . Mr. Chief justice and may it please the court, in 2017 the fifth circuit held the dapa and the expansion of daca were unlawful, a judge in this court affirmed and in the decisions the department of Homeland Security reasonably determined that it no longer wished to retain the daca policy based on its belief that the policy was illegal, its serious doubts about its illegality and its general opposition to broad, nonenforcement policies. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, its not subject to judicial review. The rescission simply ended a previous nonenforcement policy whereby the department agreed to not enforce the ina against hundreds of thousands of illegal ail epps, but the decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the agencys unreviewable discretion unless a statute restricts it, and nothing in the ina requires the department, a Law Enforcement agency
Cases. The justices are expected to hand out a decision next spring. [screams] you will hear argument first in 587, the department of Homeland Security versus legions of the university of california and the related cases. General francisco,. In 2017, the fifth circuit held a daca in the expansion of daca was likely unlawful. The judgment affirmed by equally divided courts. In the face of those decisions, the department of Homeland Security reasonably determined that it no longer wish to retain the daca policy. Based on his belief that the policy was illegal with serious doubts about the illegality and the general proposition abroad not efficient policy. That decision did not violate the apa for two reasons. First, it is not subject to judicial review. The rescission ended up nonenforcement policy whereby the department agreed to not enforce against hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. But the decision whether or not to enforce the law is committed to the agency under fuel discussio